DITTO.

Even President Obama can't stand Joe, He has to speak plainly, he just passed off the Dic and Jane books.

Obama does seem to hold his breath when Joe is allowed to talk.

No, the record of their actions -- especially, politicians and their corporate campaign donors -- have made themselves enemies of the poor.

http://occupywriters.com/by-lemony-snicket

If most of the money has been concentrated into the hands of the super rich how do you suppose the 99% of us will be able to buy anything? Are you suggesting we print more? I know how that sounds, but really think about it. The more I listen to righties, the more I wonder at their blind obedience to the "message".

rusty,

are you really reading what the people on this blog are saying? we do not hate the rich. we need rich and powerful people in this country.

the people who blog here know that most people play by the rules, including the rich.

it is the few who don't that we are referring to.

when we see that the american people overwhelmingly want to tax the rich ONLY A LITTLE BIT MORE instead of hurting the middle class and the poor, we are angry. we are angry that the republican party in washington refuses to accept what the american people want, and instead choose allegiance to those partisan pledges that are causing the gridlock in washington. i heard on my car radio another pledge is floating around, not sure on what.

and as mitch mcConnell said, 'their primary job is to make President Obama a one term president.

Waste of time, talking to a tea bagged republican is like talking to a kitchen table with the same results, no one hears you.

i know it, but i can't help myself. its fun.

they haven't been around here much for the past few days.

they must be speechless or something, like the republicans in washington.

Sorry Suzette- I was busy below responding to you. I am really glad to hear that whom and all of her buddies don't hate the rich. I'll take your word on that, as well as hers because in her comments back to you, it seems she is agreeing with you.

I did run across another of these blogs where it surely did seem like "hate the rich" was the theme. I called for your help in explaining it, but you must have missed it.

rusty,

the ROOT cause?

that would mean we have to go back before Barack Obama became president.

clinton is responsible for some of it, but W. bush is responsible for the majority of it.

Suzette- see, we will work through this concept. The root cause for this economy not currently producing the amount of jobs you wish is not what happened years ago. See, if that is the case, then Obama is throwing money down a rat hole when he wants to pass his jobs bill. The root cause for this economy not producing enough jobs is a current reality.

Stay in the present, problems cannot be solve in the past. Any activity Clinton or Bush did is something that can't be changed. Now- a policy can be changed if it is truly a root cause holding back this economy in 2011. But why, in this current environment, aren't enough jobs being produced for your liking?

rusty,

sometimes we need to look to our past to find out what went wrong and what needs to be done differently in the future. for example, many people did not know that when NAFTA was passed into law that our economy and workers would be affected. for some that only became clear years after NAFTA was passed.

i like to have the perspective that looking to the past gives me. problems are solved by looking to the past because we learn what to do or what not to do. but we also have to look to the future in solving problems as computers and "robots" become more of a replacement for humans.

so you are telling me that there is no "cause and effect" to our current economic mess? you are telling me that if i smoke 4 packs of cigarettes a day, i should not expect to pay a price with emphysema or cancer? i would do everything i could to make recovery more comfortable and possible, even if it were only for the short term, knowing that in the future i would have to make lifelong changes so this does not happen again.

mitt romney basically said that this jobs bill is only a band aid for a hemorrhage. i know you and conservatives and baggers feel that the first stimulus did nothing for jobs in america, but that is not true. almost 2 million jobs were created or saved, and some were short term. if nothing else President Obama's jobs bill would give much needed relief for people who need it. it would give them some time to stay afloat while they decide how to reshape their future. it will buy them time. we need to think about the longterm, but also help where needed for now.

this is going to be a slow crawl, much like the great depression which was caused in the same way as this economic meltdown. lessons learned in the 30's have been forgotten since about 1980.

i see nothing wrong with the gov't stepping in to help working people, just as they did with wall street. especially since wall street played a big part in causing this financial collapse.

i am sure you disagree.

no surprise there.

Ok- change the elements that you think caused the past problems. That won't add one job currently. It could prevent another meltdown. But you have to solve the problem of what is causing the issue here and now. Your cig example- brought to this discussion. A person has smoked 4 packs a day and now has a terrible disease. The government decides to help that person. The government's solution is to outlaw future cig sales. Well and good for the next person, and there was a cause and effect causing that last person's problems, but you can't change his past history and call it help. Also- remember Ross Perot in 1992- he told everyone about the "whoosh" that would occur from NAFTA- so it is a little revisionist at this point to act like we didn't know then. By the way- that was example only. NAFTA and other trade agreements have been good to us, and the announcement this morning of Obama allowing the full extent of NAFTA to go forward reflects his acknowledgement (even if he downplays it and keeps things quiet about it).

Now- what is the root cause, right now- today, of this economy not producing enough jobs for your desire? For instance- if you say that the root cause is that employment cost are 2.5% to high, then a good solution might indeed be to cut the taxes on employment by 2.5%. Obviously, though- you would be admitting that the lower end of the employment demand curve is indeed elastic (sloped significantly downward), and if you make that argument, you will have trouble selling the next minimum wage increase in a way that says it won't cost jobs. This is just an example- but if you look at Obama's "jobs" bill- you won't find that it addresses any of the current root causes. By the way- blame these thoughts on me- I haven't heard them on Fox or any talking points.

rusty,

i knew there was a tax cut in your question, definitely.

taxes are lower now than ever, and have been for 10 years. where are the jobs?

oh, that's right, there is uncertainty somewhere in there.

but because of your beliefs that we are NOT all in this together, and that we should all look out for ONLY ourselves, and that the rich should continue to get richer while we cut services to the poor and needy, i see no reason to continue with you this specific conversation.

i won't change your mind, and you certainly will not change mine.

Wrong Suzette- If you look at the root cause of why this economy isn't producing the jobs you wish, it is because of a huge housing market imbalance. Housing does drive the economy- something that wasn't lost on Bush II or Clinton. But when there are millions of vacant houses, valuations suffer, people in decent shape suddenly become "underwater", there is no demand at all for home building, home remodeling, etc- only basic necessary repairs.

Obama has developed a jobs plan that worked for many economic downturns. It didn't work in 2009, and stimulus II won't work either- because it doesn't address the root cause of the problem. Obama's plan is lower interest rates (almost zero now- where letting them go somewhat higher wouldn't hurt any expansion plans but would indeed put more money in saver's pockets), lower employment taxes (not necessarily a bad thing- but it assumes that all that is keeping employers from hiring is 2.5% in tax reductions on payroll) and then a slug of union pleasing infrastructure programs (also not necessarily bad- but it will be financed heavily at the state and local level by Muni bonds- yes those things you Democrats are wanting to start taxing- thereby driving up the cost of these projects). The other elements, likewise- do nothing to address the imbalance of housing supply/demand in any marginal way.

Now- before solution time- another issue that will be developing is that Obamacare- again, not necessarily bad to spread out the insured base- will drive a huge need for top level medical providers- Physicians and Physician extenders. We are not graduating anything near what we need to provide those needs that we've now promised- and at least in my state (Illinois), Medicare has a pathetic reimbursement rate and is greatly delayed.

One last problem that we can both agree on- we aren't getting enough revenue. Recently- you even came to the point that it isn't bad to have wealthy people. Wealthy people do pay more, in fact most, of the taxes. They also tend to own houses and by nature are well capitalized.

Why not fashion a solution that would increase the number of wealthy people, rapidly expand the physician population and also increase skilled Engineers and Scientists (that we are not producing in sufficient quantities)- thereby alleviating the housing imbalance, providing additional care for those added to health care roles, increasing the revenue brought in by all levels of government, and providing much needed Capital for any infrastructure problems. And without harming the budget deficit? A solution like that would be hated by the side that didn't think of it- but guess what- it would address the underlying problems and would make an immediate difference. It's called top-end immigration. Two to 3 million highly educated physicians, engineers, designers, computer scientists, bio-scientists- all of the above. Immigration with direct and quick path to citizenship. Instead of focusing on low end immigration problems and solutions.

See- Obama is focusing on solutions. Solutions that have possibly worked for other problems. But the solutions he is proposing aren't going to work for the problems we currently have. By the way- blaming Bush, Clinton, calling Democrats or Republicans names- starting every speech driving home the point that the Rich are cooperating and the Republicans are stupid aren't going to be effective solutions either. Obama is completely wrong. The Republicans are right in fighting him on this- but for the completely wrong reason. They are fighting him because... just because. They need to fight his solutions because his solutions address the wrong issues.

Suzette, other liberals???? response? Anything to work with? No one to even call me a Tea Party name or a Fox person or anything?

It really does appear that Democrats and liberals don't want to talk in specific, concrete issues and concepts. They would rather float around and name call and do brainless stuff?